MMA written testimony on local franchising authority

Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy
State House, Boston

Dear Chairman Finegold, Chairman Morrissey, and Members of the Committee:

Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony for the Massachusetts Municipal Association regarding H. 3765 and S.1531, An Act Promoting Consumer Choice and Competition for Cable Service.

On behalf of the cities and towns of the Commonwealth, the Massachusetts Municipal Association strongly urges you and your colleagues to give an unfavorable report to H. 3765 and S. 1531. This legislation is being promoted by Verizon Communications to undermine local franchising authority with respect to cable licensing and renewals. By imposing a totally unrealistic 95-day start-to-finish licensing process, this legislation would seriously undercut the ability of local communities to effectively negotiate these agreements to ensure adequate consumer and community protections.

By imposing an aggressive and unachievable timeline, the Verizon proposal would remove the ability of cities and towns to safeguard and protect consumer and community needs. This legislation would put the negotiating advantage in the hands of the cable providers and could raise serious legal concerns regarding existing contracts as well.

Local officials from cities and towns enthusiastically support increased competition in the cable television services marketplace. Under the well-known process that has been in place for nearly three decades, mayors, city councillors, selectmen, managers and other local officials are responsible for ensuring that all residents of their communities benefit from franchise licenses through a comprehensive negotiation process that results in agreements in the public interest. These benefits include support for community access programming (PEG) and commitments to standard clauses such as wiring public buildings and schools.

We believe that the current process is designed to ensure that competition is fair for the consumer, the public and the taxpayer. Verizon’s proposal to limit the local process to 95 days would undermine the balance that is in place now and prevent cities and towns from ensuring fairness and equity. It would be impossible for a 95-day process to provide enough time for application review, negotiation, license drafting and issuance, especially in light of the many complex issues raised by the non-standard terms and conditions commonly reported to be included in Verizon-proposed cable license applications.

It is important to note that the current process works very well and has not been a barrier to competition for other entrants into the marketplace. In just the past three years, more than 100 new cable television licenses have been issued in Massachusetts. This is further proof that the current timeline and regulations provide a more-than-adequate framework for companies that are willing to sign agreements that commit to standard conditions of accountability and service to the community and all its residents.

Verizon’s claim that the current process constrains competition is a smokescreen. Simply put, this is special-interest legislation. Verizon has never been denied a franchise agreement in Massachusetts. There is no rational basis for casting aside time-tested licensing guidelines and replacing them with radically abbreviated, anti-community rules that would maximize Verizon’s bottom-line at the expense of consumers and communities alike.

Again, we urge you to reject these two bills. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us at any time.

Thank you very much.

Sincerely,

Geoffrey C. Beckwith
MMA Executive Director